This article seems to use Jane Flegal's quote concerning data centers as a setup for a general strategy: “[they're] really invested in an electricity system that can actually serve their demand, and if we can use their political power to counter the sort of historical opposition from utilities and states, it might be a real opportunity to do something big.” This view is misaligned with the actual fundamental problem the public faces with data centers: they shouldn't have political power in the first place. The Democratic party's path forward with data centers and AI should not be to somehow harness their political power, but rather to regulate them such that they serve the public good. This strategy should be applied across the board to other "big" industries such as pharma, defense, tech, oil, ag, finance, etc. These oligopolies, which now enjoy essentially captive consumer bases, increasing treat people like cattle being led to the milking machines. Everyone understands this reality. If the Democratic party ignores this in favor of appeasement, transactional politics, and cronyism, then it will continue to be seen as elitist and undifferentiated.
Wasn't heterodoxy the premise of Andrew Yang/Christine Wittman's Forward Party?
Wouldn't heterodoxy require an acknowledgement that the opposing party might be right?
Is heterodoxy something both parties can embrace or is my party's heterodoxy better than the other party's heterodoxy?
More simply, will heterodoxy lead to more election victories?
I can understand why heterodoxy is an attractive value for those in policy. However, I think voters just want to invest in a candidate's vision and leave the details to the election winner.
Good article but "There are monopolies in the healthcare industry that must be broken up". Disagree, it's regulation that causes the monopolies in the first place.
I'm a former moderate Republican turned independent to escape MAGA (NeverTrumper) looking in on the Democratic party to not just save itself but our nation with a New Big Tent. As a homeowner who once started a simple kichen remodel but ended up having to spend a lot more time and money moving the outside window, I now know better.
MAGA and DSA politicians, pundits and advocates have been forcing a polarizing "Overton Window" remodel of our nation for many years now. I figure I'm among 2/3rds of Americans yearning for a durable coalition within our quite acceptable window. Without pointing fingers, the Democratic party should get past the midterms and immediately show Americans it will not move OUR window. Leave DSA to operate completely separate from the Democratic party just as MAGA adherents do.
Congrats Ben!
Congrats, Ben and best wishes! Looking forward to reading your work.
This article seems to use Jane Flegal's quote concerning data centers as a setup for a general strategy: “[they're] really invested in an electricity system that can actually serve their demand, and if we can use their political power to counter the sort of historical opposition from utilities and states, it might be a real opportunity to do something big.” This view is misaligned with the actual fundamental problem the public faces with data centers: they shouldn't have political power in the first place. The Democratic party's path forward with data centers and AI should not be to somehow harness their political power, but rather to regulate them such that they serve the public good. This strategy should be applied across the board to other "big" industries such as pharma, defense, tech, oil, ag, finance, etc. These oligopolies, which now enjoy essentially captive consumer bases, increasing treat people like cattle being led to the milking machines. Everyone understands this reality. If the Democratic party ignores this in favor of appeasement, transactional politics, and cronyism, then it will continue to be seen as elitist and undifferentiated.
Congrats on the new job!
Wasn't heterodoxy the premise of Andrew Yang/Christine Wittman's Forward Party?
Wouldn't heterodoxy require an acknowledgement that the opposing party might be right?
Is heterodoxy something both parties can embrace or is my party's heterodoxy better than the other party's heterodoxy?
More simply, will heterodoxy lead to more election victories?
I can understand why heterodoxy is an attractive value for those in policy. However, I think voters just want to invest in a candidate's vision and leave the details to the election winner.
Good article but "There are monopolies in the healthcare industry that must be broken up". Disagree, it's regulation that causes the monopolies in the first place.
I'm a former moderate Republican turned independent to escape MAGA (NeverTrumper) looking in on the Democratic party to not just save itself but our nation with a New Big Tent. As a homeowner who once started a simple kichen remodel but ended up having to spend a lot more time and money moving the outside window, I now know better.
MAGA and DSA politicians, pundits and advocates have been forcing a polarizing "Overton Window" remodel of our nation for many years now. I figure I'm among 2/3rds of Americans yearning for a durable coalition within our quite acceptable window. Without pointing fingers, the Democratic party should get past the midterms and immediately show Americans it will not move OUR window. Leave DSA to operate completely separate from the Democratic party just as MAGA adherents do.